On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 08:38:42AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: <...snip...> > The rolling releases will still be based on an underlying overall > Fedora OS version. I think it helps from a PR perspective to have the > Atomic Host based on new versions ready on "launch day". > > I was talking with Dusty about this the other day, and came up with > this wording: > > Final: > > It must be possible to build valid Fedora Atomic Host deliverables > (ostree, ISO, and images) from GA or post-GA packages for this Fedora > release. > > * May include zero-day updates > * "Valid" means passing the Fedora Atomic Host test automatic suite > and manual validation > > Beta: > > It must be possible to build valid Fedora Atomic Host deliverables > (ostree, ISO, and images) from this branch of Fedora. > > * I carefully didn't say "beta release" bits here. If we're > successfully building on the new branch but have some particular > issue at beta release time, it's okay to present an earlier build and > later update once that's fixed. If necessary, we can call this > "pre-release" rather than "beta". > > -- > Matthew Miller > <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Fedora Project Leader I think both of these sound fine. There's a clear line between passing and failing, and I don't *really* expect either of these to fail. I'll bring these to the QA group for discussion on Monday about accepting them as new release criteria. It would be good if people were there for the discussion. Our meetings are at 1500 UTC. Thanks! // Mike -- Fedora QA _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list -- cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
